Nekosmuse is my new god.
Jan. 8th, 2005 11:45 amThou shalt never use epithets. Oh, thankyouthankyouthankyou. If I never see Draco referred to 'the blond' or Ron called 'the redhead' again, it will be too soon.
Thou shalt use warnings. Oh, thankyouthankyouthankyou. I cracked open a fic the other day and halfway through it - Surprise! - was the rape scene. Ack. I still have that unpleasant image in my mind, and I'm glaring at author and never want to read them again.
I shalt not spoil the rest. Enjoy!
no subject
Date: 2005-01-08 08:29 pm (UTC)I feel like I have to speak out in defense of epithets. They're perfectly nice, useful little things when they're not being exploited by idiots. They can break up a section of narrative involving multiple actors of the same gender, they can be used for exposition, and--well, how the hell else am I supposed to refer to the guy whose name nobody knows yet?
Used sparingly and with an obvious referent, I don't think epithets are inexcusable. They're certainly preferable to the Baroque feats of grammar sometimes necessary to get around them.
no subject
Date: 2005-01-08 08:34 pm (UTC)Icarus
no subject
Date: 2005-01-08 08:58 pm (UTC)And the thing about fanfic is that you're more likely to get away with it than profic; because your can assume your audience knows your characters as well a you do, your epithets almost always have very obvious referents, just not in the text. I had no trouble with the HP essay that Neko linked, even the exaggerated examples. Someone who doesn't follow HP would've been way more lost.
no subject
Date: 2005-01-08 09:14 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-01-08 10:04 pm (UTC)Icarus
no subject
Date: 2005-01-09 02:30 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-01-08 11:45 pm (UTC)For example, calling Gandalf "Stormcrow," well, that brings a lot to the Lord of the Rings. The sarcasm and the very different view of Gandalf's help is eye-opening. Or calling Aragorn 'the ranger' as in 'the ranger sought ahead for a way through the marsh,' that's useful. It makes sense that the character whose POV we're seeing would think of Aragorn as a ranger in that context.
But very often epithet abusers will have the POV character think of Draco as 'the blond' in an intimate situation. That doesn't work. It adds nothing to the story, and it's too distant for that moment.
I've used epithets in situations where we don't know anything about the character except their appearance. The brown-haired guy sitting next to Harry in Cursed Artefacts For Sale. I chose that epithet with care. It tells you something about Harry's attitude towards the auction: he doesn't care, he doesn't view the others as competition; he's seeing the auction through a rather mundane perspective.
Let's see... where else... oh yeah - the second part of Reunion, Name Dropping. I use it because I use a vary limited outside perspective, witnessing two men meet outside a fine restaurant, one dark-haired, the other blonde. The reader already knows that Draco was going to meet with Snape, but since the story pertained a lot to gossip and appearances it makes sense to start out with how this appears.
Primer to the Dark Arts, Harry thinks about Snape (right after the relationship had begun), oh what was it? Something to the effect of 'the man was paranoid.' The epithet there signals that Harry has started to think of Snape as a man, not as his teacher.
So I'm agreeing with you. In a rambling sort of way. :) Epithets can add layers of meaning, but I hate it when they're laid on with a trowel, pointless, or inappropriate.
Icarus
no subject
Date: 2005-01-08 10:14 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-01-08 10:47 pm (UTC)Icarus
no subject
Date: 2005-01-08 10:49 pm (UTC)Is that even possible?
*is in awe*
no subject
Date: 2005-01-08 11:22 pm (UTC)Icarus
no subject
Date: 2005-01-09 10:02 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-01-09 10:07 am (UTC)Twice. *grins*
And I used it as a reference guide for a lot of my LotR meta. I used to post as Marileangorifurnimaluim on the Barrow-downs (a really active and popular Tolkien forum).
Icarus
no subject
Date: 2005-01-09 10:20 am (UTC)Icarus
no subject
Date: 2005-01-09 10:44 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-01-09 11:13 am (UTC)By the way, my mentor in high school was a former Catholic monk.
Tolkien himself was not trying to write a Christian story, but rather a fairy tale based upon the roots of English myth. The Lord of the Rings owes a lot more to Beowulf than it does to the Bible, and in fact, because he was writing a fictional pre-history it deliberately avoids modern Christian mythos.
Tolkien bemoaned the fact that England's myths were largely French and Greek in origin and set out to write a truly English epic. Which is why he relied so heavily on Beowulf and his research into Anglo-Saxon mythology.
Icarus
no subject
Date: 2005-01-08 09:11 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-01-08 09:52 pm (UTC)Things like rape, incest, chan, they shock and offend readers if they don't already know what they're getting into. The sense of shock is more than just moral offense: you actually lose the impact of the story. A writer needs empathy, communication with the reader. The reader steps into your little world, trusting you as a writer to not lead them astray. Allowing themselves to believe fiction, dropping their barriers.
A writing instructor once told me "never trick the reader." I didn't know why until I came across a story recently where all the facts presented in the story misled me. It deliberately led me to specific assumptions - and then the writer revealed their denouement. I was left with a bitter taste in my mouth. I did not feel the writer was clever, I felt deceived.
Not warning for offensive content is the same thing. The reader trusts you not to do that to them.
It's rarely beneficial to have the shocking content come as a surprise. Most good stories don't need that surprise to still work for the reader, and I'm not a fan of shock-value fiction, even though some friends of mine write it.
FYI, I'm just coming out of a big wankfest and I'm not really in the mood for an intense discussion. I've been doing so much of it for the last couple days.
Icarus
no subject
Date: 2005-01-08 10:23 pm (UTC)*pets you and gives you cookies*
Seriously. I'm not joking here.
Wonder if this was an argument in that wankfest, though:
Did Shakespeare warn anyone before Titus Andronikus?
Just saying :)=
no subject
Date: 2005-01-08 11:10 pm (UTC)Wacko.
But she sounded stable when I started the argument, if determined to be right at all costs.
Did Shakespeare warn anyone before Titus Andronikus?
I have a better example: did Sophocles warn for incest in Oedipus Rex?
The answer for both stories is that they didn't need to: the themes were already (at the time) well-known. In fact, the authors drew upon this knowledge in order to heighten the irony and tension.
Icarus
no subject
Date: 2005-01-08 11:21 pm (UTC)O.o <-- ah, my recent love for this icon
I have a better example
Heh, a better example indeed.
the themes were already (at the time) well-known
And isn't this so with that disclaimer stuff, that it is the sign of the times we live in? Warnings and disclaimers for adults. For mature, responsible people who watch where they tread and are able to make choices and learn from mistakes?
Saw a reality accident movie once. Got traumatized. Won't see any of those again.
Saw a Steven Seagal movie once, with a torture scene in it. Got traumatized. Won't watch Steven Seagal movies again.
That would be my choice. The trauma is also mine.
But I'm not made of sugar and I won't dissolve in the rain.
And now, for something completely different, because I don't want to start a discussion since you're tired of one:
Aliens? Lava? J/D? Ring any bells?
:)=
no subject
Date: 2005-01-08 11:57 pm (UTC)Ha. A wank of epic proportions. Last I looked it was up to 238 comments in one journal entry alone.
mature, responsible people who watch where they tread and are able to make choices and learn from mistakes?
Yes, that would be the case if we didn't have the convention of warning for certain types of content. Since we do, readers expect this.
I'll tell you though that I did have an incest fic where the opening would have been spoiled if I'd warned for it. I took a risk and wrote in the summary (on a site that has lots of sexual content at an R-rating) Adult subject matter. You have been warned.
It worked. That was enough for people. It helped that the incest was clear within the first page, so those who didn't like it hadn't made a commitment to the story yet. I don't think I would have done it if the incest appeared later.
Aliens? Lava? J/D? Ring any bells?
Oh yes.
I'm going to be good and do my homework first.
Icarus
no subject
Date: 2005-01-09 10:11 am (UTC)Sounds interesting. Almost wish I'd been there - I could have contributed some much-needed extra noise. 8-)
no subject
Date: 2005-01-09 10:18 am (UTC)Icarus
no subject
Date: 2005-01-09 10:54 am (UTC)I would like to be clearer about this. What you described seems akin to the sort of thing that would be regarded as a triumph in detective fiction, and that is the strength of Agatha Christie. Have you ever read her better novels? I ask because I would like to know in what way features that make her work so satisfying appear, in this experience, so disappointing. Where is the difference? I am really interested to know.
no subject
Date: 2005-01-09 11:19 am (UTC)Different genres set the reader up for different expectations. In mystery, the reader knows they're supposed to hunt down clues, and they take great satisfaction in cleverly disguised hints and a plot they couldn't figure untangle.
In other genres such as romance, we expect to be able to trust the writer, so we take what they tell us at face value. So we feel like fools when the writer's sneaky.
It's interesting the cues that the writer uses to indicate the genre and set up the expectations of the reader.
Icarus
no subject
Date: 2005-01-09 12:23 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-01-08 10:57 pm (UTC)And that should be printed out and plastered onto monitors of fan fiction writers out there. And out here :)=
*goes to print and find duct tape*
no subject
Date: 2005-01-08 09:39 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-01-08 09:57 pm (UTC)Icarus
no subject
Date: 2005-01-08 10:10 pm (UTC)Completely OT and half-embarrassing:
Date: 2005-01-08 09:48 pm (UTC)Re: Completely OT and half-embarrassing:
Date: 2005-01-08 09:55 pm (UTC)I stopped using the filter for the most part because my sense of paranoia was fleeting and temporary. :D Also, when the main list is 600 people and the filter is 400 people, what difference does it make? *snort*
I'm almost sure you're on it though.
Icarus
no subject
Date: 2005-01-09 03:04 am (UTC)Special circle of hell reserved for those addicted to describing Harry as the emerald-eyed boy/youth/man/wizard.
no subject
Date: 2005-01-09 09:07 am (UTC)Dear lord. Did you really say "emerald-eyed youth"? Just when I thought it couldn't get any worse.
Icarus
no subject
Date: 2005-01-09 10:08 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-01-09 10:17 am (UTC)On the rest, well yeah. That's the whole point of the post. It's not for the good writers to follow slavishly, but for the crap writers who consistently abuse all of this. I mean, when commandment 8 or 9 is "their" and "they're" do not mean the same thing! -- it's pretty clear what level of writer Neko means.
Icarus